An ambient air particulate matter sampling study was conducted at the Wood Buffalo Environmental Association (WBEA) AMS-1 Fort McKay monitoring station in the Athabasca Oil Sand Region (AOSR) in Alberta, Canada from February 2010 to July 2011. Daily 24 h integrated fine (PM 2.5 ) and coarse (PM 10–2.5 ) particulate matter was collected using a sequential dichotomous sampler. Over the duration of the study, 392 valid daily dichotomous PM 2.5 and PM 10–2.5 sample pairs were collected with concentrations of 6.8 ± 12.9 μg m − 3 (mean ± standard deviation) and 6.9 ± 5.9 μg m − 3 , respectively. A subset of 100 filter pairs was selected for element analysis by energy dispersive X-ray fluorescence and dynamic reaction cell inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. Application of the U.S. EPA positive matrix factorization (PMF) receptor model to the study data matrix resolved five PM 2.5 sources explaining 96% of the mass including oil sands upgrading (32%), fugitive dust (26%), biomass combustion (25%), long-range Asian transport lead source (9%), and winter road salt (4%). An analysis of historical PM 2.5 data at this site shows that the impact of smoke from wildland fires was particularly high during the summer of 2011. PMF resolved six PM 10–2.5 sources explaining 99% of the mass including fugitive haul road dust (40%), fugitive oil sand (27%), a mixed source fugitive dust (16%), biomass combustion (12%), mobile source (3%), and a local copper factor (1%). Results support the conclusion of a previous epiphytic lichen biomonitor study that near-field atmospheric deposition in the AOSR is dominated by coarse fraction fugitive dust from bitumen mining and upgrading operations, and suggest that fugitive dust abatement strategies targeting the three major sources of PM 10–2.5 (e.g., oil sand mining, haul roads, bulk material stockpiles) would significantly reduce near-field atmospheric deposition gradients in the AOSR and reduce ambient PM concentrations in the Fort McKay community.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Landis et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: